Twitter cyclists v Twitter driver video - who's right?

[anonymous-user]

321boost said:

I have seen a case similar to this where the driver was found not at fault at all.

Feel free to post the link to it, so we can examine it and decide if it really is a similar case to this one.

[321boost]

Lord Marylebone said:

321boost said:

I have seen a case similar to this where the driver was found not at fault at all.

Feel free to post the link to it, so we can examine it and decide if it really is a similar case to this one.

Cant as it was a work colleagues case.

[ruggedscotty]

okgo said:

PH User said:

He erractilly moved right a couple of feet? Or in other words, a swerve.

I agree though that you should anticipate poor road use by others.

As always with these things, would you treat a horse the same way? If you can say yes, then probably you couldn't have done anything different in a car.

The problem with many drivers is that they've never cycled on the road. So they'll be oblivious to many of the things that you have to seriously be wary of as a cyclist, most in your control of course, but sometimes very hard to avoid.

Cyclist hits a huge pothole and falls into the road, you run him over if you're on his back wheel/giving barely any space
Cyclist rides over a drain cover in the wet and skids out, same as above
Gravel on junctions etc etc same outcome

The roads in the UK are not in bad shape, but there's lots of things that you just don't need to worry about in a car, that you do on a bike. And if you're not giving people space then it is possible you'll end up doing huge damage.

I was cycling years ago in Parliament Sq, I hit a rut in the road which jammed my chain and threw me over the bars, because some bus driver was right on my wheel he was quite close to killing me, all because of his attitude of sitting 6 ft off my wheel. Idiotic and needless.

This - the roads in towns are littered with imperfections that a car driver will have no idea about. Cyclists often move about to avoid holes and ruts in the surface, and they are accused of wobbling... No car drivers need to give cyclists room - if i can boot your car with my toecaps on then you are simply passing too close. think about it - your in a ton of metal with plenty to seperate you from the road. a cyclist isnt.

Forget the cyclist in that video and watch the driver - no hazard perception or anticipation what so ever. and that could have been an accident so easily - if the driver had been a bit closer, or the cyclist had moved later.

remember the pyramid of incidents then near misses etc. Unless both the driver and the cyclist adjust thier mindsets then its only a matter of time...

[boyse7en]

321boost said:

Lord Marylebone said:

321boost said:

I have seen a case similar to this where the driver was found not at fault at all.

Feel free to post the link to it, so we can examine it and decide if it really is a similar case to this one.

Cant as it was a work colleagues case.

He was the driver who hit a cyclist from behind?
I'm intrigued to know what the facts were that ruled he was not at fault.

[Ken Figenus]

okgo said:

Because they have an in-built hate for cyclists, like most of the UK. It really is an embarassing personality trait of our country (one of many).

This is a minefield of hateful tit for tat and it is all a bit tragic - wasn't really aware of it since plumbing the depths of Twitter. Absolute hate exists for cars and their drivers in the most vocal and militant cycling tribes - no doubt about it. Hate begets hate and then add to the (at times valid) impression that vehicle drivers cant be treated harshly enough or road re-appropriated from them quickly enough and it all ends in a mud slinging fest. It's so tragic really as for every cycle you see you probably are getting to where you want to go go quicker - will never forget beating an F40 from Crouch end to to W1 a good decade ago . This was always my 4 wheeled logic - these days maybe less - but every cyclist should be a positive on so many levels. Particularly me! But they DO alienate people and some drivers have a very $hitty impatient attitude towards cyclists and joke about pushing them into bushes etc.

I want to say something very calming, positive and hippy next but guess I can only control my own attitudes and approach. Peace out man!

[redjohn]

Driver

Committed to an inappropriate overtake due to speed, road position and island/pinch point.

Looks like the cyclist has reacted to the 1st accident, turned to look and wobbled into the road. Driver failed to notice 1st accident and nearly had a second.

Credit to driver that he was paying attention and reacted in time.

[anonymous-user]

321boost said:

Lord Marylebone said:

321boost said:

I have seen a case similar to this where the driver was found not at fault at all.

Feel free to post the link to it, so we can examine it and decide if it really is a similar case to this one.

Cant as it was a work colleagues case.

So what? Seems more likely this is a tale from MakeyUppyLand.

[mmm-five]

MiseryStreak said:

...you don’t ever drive onto hatched lines...

You might want to refresh your learning on that point (try rule 130)...note that in this case the border of the hatched area has broken white lines.

Still think they're both to blame though.

Although it now seems from some of the responses on there that a car driver can never do enough to not be at fault...even if he left 5m of space and waited until the road was completely clear, the cyclist could still have decided to DELIBERATELY (not accidentally due to an imaginary pothole/cat/dog/child as all the other posters seem to suggest) perform an unexpected U-turn or swerve straight in from of him.

[OverSteery]

There are some appalling cyclists on the road with an equally bad attitude.

There are some appalling car drivers on the road with an equally bad attitude.

There is a difference, though. One group are far less likely to personally suffer for their aggressive incompetence with major injuries/death.

Being in "control" of a 2 ton high speed projectile demands greater care

Edited by OverSteery on Monday 8th March 13:05

[tigger1]

Disco You said:

Both. Poor of the cyclist to make a positional change without looking. Poor of the car to be overtaking too close and to have such a high closing speed around the pinch point.

This.

The speed of the approach of the car at a pinch point was ridiculous / unnecessary. Driver starts the overtake before they've cleared the pinchpoint, which was never really going to work.

Cyclists should always look behind before moving out (although at what point does "moving 6 inches around a hole" become "moving out"?) - but it's 100% the job of the person overtaking to make sure it's safe to complete the overtake. It wasn't safe to overtake?

[Killboy]

321boost said:

Cant as it was a work colleagues case.

What kind of case was it?

[PH User]

Dracoro said:

PH User said:

He erractilly moved right a couple of feet? Or in other words, a swerve.

I agree though that you should anticipate poor road use by others.

Depends how you define a swerve, if a car moved 2 feet right, would that be a swerve?

But, that's besides the point, as we agree it was very poor anticipation by the driver.

So we can't agree as to if it was a "swerve" or an "erratic change of direction" but we do both agree that neither of them displayed good road use.

[321boost]

boyse7en said:

321boost said:

Lord Marylebone said:

321boost said:

I have seen a case similar to this where the driver was found not at fault at all.

Feel free to post the link to it, so we can examine it and decide if it really is a similar case to this one.

Cant as it was a work colleagues case.

He was the driver who hit a cyclist from behind?
I'm intrigued to know what the facts were that ruled he was not at fault.

No the cyclist came in their way.

[321boost]

Killboy said:

321boost said:

Cant as it was a work colleagues case.

What kind of case was it?

Police was called. Insurance involved. Cyclist tried to claim against driver and lost.

Edited by 321boost on Monday 8th March 13:37

[321boost]

Ken Figenus said:

okgo said:

Because they have an in-built hate for cyclists, like most of the UK. It really is an embarassing personality trait of our country (one of many).

This is a minefield of hateful tit for tat and it is all a bit tragic - wasn't really aware of it since plumbing the depths of Twitter. Absolute hate exists for cars and their drivers in the most vocal and militant cycling tribes - no doubt about it. Hate begets hate and then add to the (at times valid) impression that vehicle drivers cant be treated harshly enough or road re-appropriated from them quickly enough and it all ends in a mud slinging fest. It's so tragic really as for every cycle you see you probably are getting to where you want to go go quicker - will never forget beating an F40 from Crouch end to to W1 a good decade ago . This was always my 4 wheeled logic - these days maybe less - but every cyclist should be a positive on so many levels. Particularly me! But they DO alienate people and some drivers have a very $hitty impatient attitude towards cyclists and joke about pushing them into bushes etc.

I want to say something very calming, positive and hippy next but guess I can only control my own attitudes and approach. Peace out man!

Absolutely this.

[MiseryStreak]

mmm-five said:

MiseryStreak said:

...you don’t ever drive onto hatched lines...

You might want to refresh your learning on that point (try rule 130)...note that in this case the border of the hatched area has broken white lines.

Still think they're both to blame though.

Although it now seems from some of the responses on there that a car driver can never do enough to not be at fault...even if he left 5m of space and waited until the road was completely clear, the cyclist could still have decided to DELIBERATELY (not accidentally due to an imaginary pothole/cat/dog/child as all the other posters seem to suggest) perform an unexpected U-turn or swerve straight in from of him.

Yes, you’re right. I didn’t examine the video very closely. And I break traffic laws all the time, probably every time I drive, I’m far from perfect. I don’t pass cyclists too closely though, as the risk of injuring or killing someone is too high.

The militant cyclists who think they own the road and clog up social media with their frothing bile are their own worst enemy. They actively go looking for altercations, on the road and online.

Yet for every one of them, there are ten motorists who think it’s ok to close pass a cyclist, if there’s not enough room and they’re in a hurry etc.

It doesn’t matter who’s right and who’s wrong. Morally or legally, you just don’t need to create this unnecessary risk by occupying the same space as another road user.

[Killboy]

321boost said:

No the cyclist came in their way.

321boost said:

Killboy said:

321boost said:

Cant as it was a work colleagues case.

What kind of case was it?

Police was called. Insurance involved. Cyclist tried to claim against driver and lost.

Edited by 321boost on Monday 8th March 13:37

So not similar at all? And not tested in court but by the insurance companies? Mmmmm

[okgo]

Ken Figenus said:

This is a minefield of hateful tit for tat and it is all a bit tragic - wasn't really aware of it since plumbing the depths of Twitter. Absolute hate exists for cars and their drivers in the most vocal and militant cycling tribes - no doubt about it. Hate begets hate and then add to the (at times valid) impression that vehicle drivers cant be treated harshly enough or road re-appropriated from them quickly enough and it all ends in a mud slinging fest. It's so tragic really as for every cycle you see you probably are getting to where you want to go go quicker - will never forget beating an F40 from Crouch end to to W1 a good decade ago . This was always my 4 wheeled logic - these days maybe less - but every cyclist should be a positive on so many levels. Particularly me! But they DO alienate people and some drivers have a very $hitty impatient attitude towards cyclists and joke about pushing them into bushes etc.

I want to say something very calming, positive and hippy next but guess I can only control my own attitudes and approach. Peace out man!

My previous post was that actual leading newspapers like the Daily Mail continue the anti-cycling agenda. The only thing you could say that does this from the other side of the fence, at best, are specialist publications in the cycling world - i.e. pretty small and certainly not the voice of the populous. Almost every cyclist I know has a car, including me. Most drivers I know do not spend much time cycling, it is a huge imbalance of negativity IMO.

Anyway, the reason most cyclists have a lot to say about any of these matters is as mentioned above, if I get it wrong, or lose my temper, I'm probably not going to be hurting anyone else, quite a different story in a car. Just because I may chose to ride a bike more than I drive, doesn't mean I'm not someone's father or husband etc.

[Killboy]

Makes a compelling reason for a cyclist to occupy the entire lane actually.

[321boost]

Killboy said:

321boost said:

No the cyclist came in their way.

321boost said:

Killboy said:

321boost said:

Cant as it was a work colleagues case.

What kind of case was it?

Police was called. Insurance involved. Cyclist tried to claim against driver and lost.

Edited by 321boost on Monday 8th March 13:37

So not similar at all? And not tested in court but by the insurance companies? Mmmmm

No it was very similar from looking at their dashcam.